Michael Steele speaks truth to power

I'm not really sure what to make of this video that has just surfaced of Michael Steele at a fundraiser in Connecticut talking about the Afghanistan war.

It's unequivocal: Steele says that the war was one of Obama's choosing, that we shouldn't be there, and -- crucially -- that history teaches us it's probably a lost cause. That puts him at odds with the entire GOP and many Dems. It's the must-watch video of the morning:

Steele starts off with a standard GOP talking point: That Stanley McChrystal's barbed comments about members of the administration show "frustration" on the part of military leaders towards Obama. But then he seems to veer off in an odd direction:

"Keep in mind again, federal candidates, this was a war of Obama's choosing. This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in."...

"It was the president who was trying to be cute by half by flipping a script demonizing Iraq, while saying the battle really should be in Afghanistan. Well, if he's such a student of history, has he not understood that you know that's the one thing you don't do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? All right, because everyone who has tried, over a thousand years of history, has failed. And there are reasons for that. There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan."

Let me have a stab at guessing what happened here. I say Steele initially meant to say that the Afghan war wasn't a war of our choosing because we were attacked on September 11th, forcing us to invade. But that came out all wrong because he garbled it by mixing it with an attack on Obama.

Next, Steele tried to attack Obama by pointing out that during the campaign he insulated himself against charges that he's a dove by calling for a ramp up in Afghanistan. Fair enough. But then he compounded the mess by slipping into a kind of auto-pilot mode where he just started criticizing the Afghan war as a disaster and unwinnable because it's now Obama's war. Result: Steele said that Obama chose this war, that we shouldn't be there, and we now can't win.

Anyone got a better explanation?

UPDATE, 10:44 a.m.: RNC spokesman Doug Heye clarifies:

The Chairman clearly supports our troops but believes that success of the war effort in Afghanistan requires the ongoing support of the American people.

The responsibility for building and maintaining that strategy falls squarely on the shoulders of the President. Like so many Americans, Chairman Steele wants to hear an explanation from President Obama on what his strategy is for winning the war in Afghanistan. The Petraeus hearings were an opportunity - a missed opportunity - to do that. Instead, all we hear from the President is criticism of his predecessor for doing exactly the same thing.

At the same time, Congress must stop playing politics with the war and provide the funding our troops need to win and come home.

Greg, there must be a Steele speech (or someone from the GOP) who attacked Obama in anticipation of his decision to pull out of Afghanistan (before he set the timeline). They would have made reference to the necessity of fighting the Taliban and AQ and so on. It would make a nice pairing with what Steele is saying.

I think he said what he meant. He knows support for that war is low and that since Pres Obama escalated there he owns it now.remember when Repubs voted against war funding? Expect at least a few to flip the script now. Especially since McChrystal was fired.

Funny thing is I actually heard the phrase "cut and run" dusted off last week when some folks were arguing against the withdrawal date.

"Congress must stop playing politics with the war and provide the funding our troops need to win and come home."

A nice remark. Someone should tell the RNC how many Republicans voted against war funding and how many times the Senate Republicans have filibustered war funding since President Obama came in to office. Someone needs to remind them (especially Cindy McCain) how Republicans including John McCain voted against the troops. Sorry, but Mrs. McCain's bs voting against the troops whining during the campaign still bugs me as she and her husband are giant, collosal hypocrits on the matter.

Steele's comments after Obama's speech last December. Make of it what you will.

"A war we have to win"

“Although this decision took far too long and it should not have, I am glad the president will finally provide General McChrystal with the troops he needs. However, tonight’s speech must be the beginning, not the end, of the case President Obama makes to the American people as to why this is, as he said during the campaign, ‘a war we have to win.’ If the president remains committed to this crucial fight, Republicans – and the American people – will stand with him. But sending mixed signals by outlining the exit before these troops even get on the ground undermines their ability to succeed.”

More Wash Post garbage. Michael Steele knows nothing of Afghanistan, more about topless bars. We should never have been in Iraq but the Republicans are spending a tremendous amount of time on Afghanistan and trying their darndest not to mention Iraq and George Bush. Ever thought how strange it is that in all their campaigning, they never ever mention George Bush's name? Wonder why?

A better explanation: "Those who revise history are doomed to look like fools." Not that this is a first for Steele, he seems to be remarkably adept at looking like a fool in public. Steele has apparently forgotten about 9/11, Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, "the Alliance of the willing" and George W. Bush. Well, I understand wanting to forget about the latter.

Too bad that the Republican Party has confused "scoring points" against the Democrats with "leadership."

Barry the incompetent boob Obama, the chickenhawk who never served a day in uniform, has already sent 509 American soldiers to their deaths in Aghanistan. In 17 dismal months Barry the inept bungler has sent more to their deaths than were lost during the first seven years of the war, 2001 through 2010.

[source: icasualties.org]

This year alone this headless chicken in the White House has already sent 203 American soldiers to their deaths, and the year is only half over.

Michael Steele hadn't been in the news for a while. So he did something to tell people he is still around. And he is still trying his best to get fired. But GOP knows better than that! So the game goes on.

Sadly Steele is right when he says we cannot win in Afghanistan -- at least that's what some of the troops are saying.

A friend's son is an officer based in Kandufar. He's on the ground, has seen it all, and was an eager volunteer. But after spending over a year on the front lines in Afghanistan, he can't wait to get out of there. The first hand information he has acquired while there, and his experience on the ground, has convinced him that this war is unwinnable. We cannot win the hearts and minds of the locals because the Taliban are their sons and fathers, brothers and cousins -- they are family. They are united in fighting an invader -- us -- and just as we would never back down if a foreign power invaded the USA, they will not back down from our invasion.

It's a shame that the Republican high command disavowed Steele's sadly accurate assessment that we cannot win in Afghanistan -- and it's a shame that Steele has to politicize the war. Anybody who said this sort of thing about Bush's Iraq War -- based on faulty intelligence -- was called a traitor and unamerican. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, I guess Mr. Steele is proudly a traitor and unamerican for politicizing the war rather than simply stating his conclusion that it's unwinnable.

Steele is right about the "winnability" of the Afghanistan war (but wrong about just about everything else). We're not going to revise the Afghanistan mindset by blowing up more cities, more towns, more families and neighborhoods of Afghanistan.

It's too bad that Steel will have to walk-back the comments because the military backers of the GOP will demand it.

In 17 dismal months Barry the inept bungler has sent more American soldiers to their deaths than were lost during the first seven years of the war, 2001 through 2007

[source: icasualties.org]

____________________________

Two simple points to screwjob the infinite moron:
1) Had Doubya the Dufus completed the mission in Afghanistan as he pledged following 9/11 we would not still be fighting this war, would be celebrating a free and independent Afghanistan and our only argument would be whether we let Bin Laden's family have his body or do we put his head on a stick to warn anyone who wants to attack America.

2) 4,411 Americans have needlessly died (source = same) fighting Doubya the Dufus' personal and needless war in Iraq.

You remember that one - the one he lied to get started, the one where Richard "Dick" Cheney said we would be greated as conquering heroes by happy peasants with flowers like the French in WWII, the one Doubya the Dufus keep the cost of hidden so the deficits he was running up would not show up in official statistics, the one that destabilized the region and not only has now made Iran the primary power but has even led to Iran's traditional enemy - Iraq - to become friendly with Iran.

You want to turn the deaths of Americans into some petty little score in your inane and impish posts. Think again, child. If the previous president had been more interested in doing his job this war would be over or close to over.

Instead, like most conservatives when the going gets tough, he cut and ran. Now a real president has to clean up his mess.

Poor screwjob16. He's obviously insane (and has a real hate on for the President), but the poor guy is forced to fight on - relatively alone - as each and every day unimpeachable evidence that his party is filled with moronic numbskulls, bigots and weirdos comes to light. I feel for you screwjob. It's not easy to have to admit that you belong to a fraternity of idiots that most Americans get daily amusement out of mocking.

sounds of the GOP...Flip..flop..flip..flop..flip..flop....dill baby drill, the governmnet is failing the people with BP, the government is failing the people in Iraq and Afghanisthan, jobs transfered to China and India are good for America..flip..flop..flip..flop..like the wings of a butterfly.

He may be able to bring down the entire Repuglican Party single-handed.

And can't you just about feel the palpable seething hatred of the racist GOP base over him? To make them squirm about Obama is delicious, but forcing them to have their party led by a black man is beyond perfect.

Micheal, poor Michael he was born with a raggedy bobo in his mouth. Really folks, Michael Steele is an instrument of the GOP. They are using him to attack President Obama, better a black man attacking the President than a white one. This is a practice that has been going on since slavery. The latest twist is having white women like Sarah Barracuda, Malkin, Coulter, Big Mouth Bachman and a few others to promote the GOP's drivel and lies on our President.There has been no black pundit/journalist nor Congressional person willing to tell them to "shut up" and stop the lies. Guess who will? Your regular black man/or woman would be happy to speak on Steele, Palin and the rest of the aforementioned trailer trash.

No one cares what Republicans think, because they don't and they don't have to. Their votes come from people who'd rather not, thank you very much. Their voters elected Bush/Cheney, twice; their voters think we'd be better off right now if John McCain were President.

Micheal, poor Michael he was born with a raggedy bobo in his mouth. Really folks, Michael Steele is an instrument of the GOP. They are using him to attack President Obama, better a black man attacking the President than a white one. This is a practice that has been going on since slavery. The latest twist is having white women like Sarah Barracuda, Malkin, Coulter, Big Mouth Bachman and a few others to promote the GOP's drivel and lies on our President.There has been no black pundit/journalist nor Congressional person willing to tell them to "shut up" and stop the lies. Guess who will? Your regular black man/or woman would be happy to speak on Steele, Palin and the rest of the aforementioned trailer trash.

At the current rate by mid-September Barry the inept stumblebum will have sent more American soldiers to their deaths in Afghanistan than were lost during all eight years of the Bush presidency. That will occur around the 20-month mark of Barry's dismal term in office.

PLEASE TAKE YOUR MEDS! The only thing you convince people of is that you are a complete idiot filled with hate! Sorry you don't like Obama, but contrary to the reality you want to live in, he was DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED. Deal with it and shut the hell up. Everyone is embarrassed for you, except for yourself.

So while General Petraeus is in Europe, trying to to convince our NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan, the Chairman of the Republican Party is telling the world, "This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in."

They don't come any dumber or more treasonous than the members of the GOP (Goobers Only Party).

Steele says that the war was one of Obama's choosing, that we shouldn't be there, and -- crucially -- that history teaches us it's probably a lost cause.
-------------------------
Shuck and Jive Steele is at it again. The GOP needs to put a muzzle on their dog.

For the first time I'm actually hopeful we will win in Afghanistan. Since Steele is wrong about everything that spews out of his mouth, he must be wrong about this too!

General McChrystal asked Barry the inept bungler for more 80,000 soldiers for a surge in Afghanistan, with no preset time limit.

Barry the incompetent boob of a boob put up only 30,000 soldiers, and then told the Taliban when they were leaving.

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob16
-------------------------
He screwball16 -- which side are you on? First you cry like a baby because he doesn't send enough troops and then you wet yourself because so many are being killed.

Call your nurse to change your diaper and bring you your meds so that you are fit to be around civilized people.

Meantime, rush over to the Dousche Limpbag site where nut jobs like you are greeted like the new Messiahs by your fellow Dildo-Heads.

Now get back to your job as head slurpee maker at 7-11 and leave the thinking to people with brains - which leaves out you and your fellow Republicretins.

Micheal Steele hates white people. He obviously hates his country as well. How dare he argue with the commander in chief during a time of war? He's undermining our troops and want's us to "cut and run".

Nice to see how Republican talking points work nicely against them.... That is if you live in an actual world of reality, not the make believe imaginary place where the GOP can make arguments only against Dems when they DO THE EXACT SAME THINGS!

DUMP OBAMA! CLINTON IN 2012! IT'S THE ONLY WAY WE DEMOCRATS CAN RETAIN POWER! OBAMA IS POISON TO THE PARTY!

Talk about silly.

1) clinton won't challenge Obama since she is in his administration.
2) Obama remains very popular with a big majority of democrats (clearly you are not one)
3) There is absolutely no reason to think that Clinton will be more popular than Obama in 2012.

"The president has received a document from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, officially asking for up to 40,000 more U.S. troops, aides said." (CNN Politics.com, Thu October 8, 2009).

McChrystal got the number and the plan he asked for.

The incompetent boob here is the poster boy for tea bag ineptness, screwjob.

The "deadline" you moron, is not a date the US troopps will pack their bags and leave but a target date for starting a draw down of troops.

President Obama has said that the date is not set in stone and will be reviewed and adjusted based on progress.

Listen up screwjob, I know they do not cover World History in 2nd grade so this might help you:

This whole thing about wars in Afghanistan being historically unwinable is hooha. The reason there is not strong government in Afghanistan is because so many wars have been WON in the country.

Because of their location in the midst of the spice trade routes lots of powerful nations have wanted to control those passes through the mountains. The legacy is a weak government and entrenched war lords.

Afghanistan needs to be able to defend itself if it is going to be a free and independent nation. Right now it is a tea bag paradise - a weak central government and at the mercy of extremist factions.

steele sez: "Well, if he's such a student of history, has he not understood that you know that's the one thing you don't do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? All right, because everyone who has tried, over a thousand years of history, has failed."

how in the world can you try to spin this as steele *not* saying it's a lost cause?

really, please explain because your reasoning does not seem the least bit plausible.

georges2 is just trolling, poorly. he's a republican trying to relive the campaign, pretending to be a democrat and trying, again, poorly, to cause infighting.

like most of the people claiming to be pumas online, they would start off by saying the were a lifelong democrat and clinton supporter but that they couldn't support obama, despite their positions being relatively similar.

they they would spout rightwing republican talking points, usually in all caps...

It's July 4th weekend and I love America but everyone in the know sees the writing on the 1,000 year old wall. It's been tried folks cut and run is our only option. We are not world police or invading conquerers but we try to act like both. Lets remember the armies that failed before us had no rules of combat like we do. We won't carpet bomb or drop nukes. Those are really our only options to subjugate this place and even then more people run in after the smoke is clear from other countries to take up the cause i.e. Korean and Vietnam war. We need to redefine victory. We've inflicted orders of magnitude more causalities on the enemy than they on us, what else do we have to prove here?

screwjob16 wrote "In 17 dismal months Barry the inept bungler has sent more to their deaths than were lost during the first seven years of the war, 2001 through 2010."

Well, screwjob16, your math is hilarious. First, 2001-2010 is not the "first seven years of the war."

The actual number of US casualties in the first six years of Bush's war was 8,792. Obama has lost 712 troops per your numbers. In case you need a little help with the numbers, 712 is *not* greater than 8,792. It is 91.9% less.

Obama has a ways to go before he catches up with the 10,000 US soldiers and 500,000 Iraqis George W. Bush got killed. Under Obama the military has had a casualty rate less than half of that seen in the Bush Years. But then Bush was the President who lied in order to send inadequately equipped American men and women to Iraq and in so doing imperiled our victory in the war on terror and allowed our chief enemy, Osama bin Laden, to walk free.

Unfortunately, this will not stop the people who are anti-Obama just because (and how dare you suggest to them it is because he is Black - even though they oppose him with the same anger and vehemence when he proposes something they supported just yesterday as any other time)...

Case in point - Immigration. President Obama offered a proposal that was essentially the same as the one "W" offered in 2008 that was almost passed and can't find a single republican to even admit they voted for it under Bush.

Tea Party Supporters Overlap Republican Base
Eight out of 10 Tea Party supporters are Republicans
by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- There is significant overlap between Americans who identify as supporters of the Tea Party movement and those who identify as conservative Republicans. Their similar ideological makeup and views suggest that the Tea Party movement is more a rebranding of core Republicanism than a new or distinct entity on the American political scene.

p)arty u)nity m)y a)ss -- it was an acronym used by people who claimed to be lifelong democrats and clinton supporters who were so upset she lost that they supported mccain/palin instead.

maybe some were dems who, probably for racist reasons couldn't support obama. but i think the vast majority of people posting online and claiming puma identity were actually republicans trying to cause infighting, mainly because they'd then spout rightwing republcian talking points, usually, as with the current poseur, in all caps.

Mr.Steele does not know his history at all.
Western powers stated "play" there a little before 300 B.C. That's a little before a thousand years ago. Alexander the Great started it on his way to conquer India and see the Indian Ocean. He also tried to bring western civilization (Hellenism) there as well. Kandahar was originally named Alexandropolis, one of many cities with the same name he founded during that period. He succeded militarily for a while and then he had to leave that area. After a few hundred years traces of that dominance disappeared and if you read any of the history of that campaign the Greeks only conclusion was the only way to control the country was to "Kill Them All". So much for hearts and minds and all that nonsense that never works. Warlords and civil war,and tough independent people who will not be dominated by outsiders. Greeks, Russians, British or Americans. Didn't any of our political leadership geniuses take western civ 101. Billions of dollars and thousands of lives and about 2400 years same result. Shouldn't we be looking for terrorists in Saudi Arabia. Oh I forgot, they have all the oil and complementary cultural values. Nice fashions and drivers licenses for women are easy to get as well. Have we not learned anything. Fight em there before we have to fight em here. The Republican mantra. Get real, do you think we are all that stupid. Ask your oil corporate employers, they surely will know. Later